Unit of Assessment

Summary Impact Type

Research Subject Area(s)

Download original

Summary of the impact

This case study captures the aftermath of the abolition of Regional
Development Agencies and Government Offices in England after 2010. The
research underpinning this case study analysed the shift from
`regionalism' to `localism' in the North East of England and found that
the abolition of the regional tier of governance in England did not
invalidate the continuing need for multi-level policy coordination,
networking and `voice' at the regional level. These findings,
characterised as `Common-Sense Regionalism', directly led to the creation
(by Central Government) of a Cross-Government Group of national and
sub-national civil servants, representatives from local government and
from the voluntary sector.

Underpinning research

The research of Professor Keith Shaw (employed at Northumbria
from April 1983), developed at Northumbria University after 1997, has
focused on issues of accountability, democracy and representation within
sub-national governance, which includes research on deliberative democracy
and inclusive governance developed both prior to, and after, the 2004
referendum on a directly-elected assembly for the North East of England
(Shaw et al, 2004; 2006; 2007).

The specific research underpinning this case study was funded by a grant
from the Millfield House Foundation in 2011. It examined how both
sub-national and national decision-makers responded to the abolition of
English regional structures in the context of maintaining an effective
voice for the North East, particularly in light of the scale of public
expenditure cuts in the region, the range of economic and social problems
facing the region and the potential impact of a more independent Scotland.

The research methodology - based on a co-production research model -
draws upon data from both semi-structured individual interviews and four
round table meetings (three in the North East and one in London) that took
place between January and May 2011. Through this approach, the views and
opinions of over 60 stakeholders were captured. They included: former
regional officials; local government politicians and officers; MPs;
academics; representatives of the Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) and
business sectors; Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs); representatives
from policy areas including economic development, culture, tourism,
housing, youth and children's services, and health; and senior Whitehall
civil servants from six different government departments, including those
with departmental responsibilities specifically for the North of England.

Based on the detailed analysis of the extensive qualitative data, and on
how key stakeholders interpreted the changes, the key research findings
were that:

The end of regional structures meant the loss of an effective voice to
present the region's case and insufficient channels of communication to
get messages to Whitehall and Westminster. There were also concerns
relating to the loss of resources, strategic thinking and analytical
capacity.

Nostalgia should be avoided at all costs. It was important to look for
opportunities within the new sub-national arrangements and not forget
that the `old' system of governance was itself flawed.

While some interventions are best done at the local level, the
research concluded that there is still a need to retain cooperation and
collaboration on a `larger than local' basis for functions including
skills, economic development, housing, transport, public health,tourism
and culture.

The nature of the relationship between the local level and Whitehall
under the new arrangements is still evolving. Whitehall wants to have a
supporting role, providing advice and feedback rather than top-down
guidance or direction. In particular, the research argued that there are
clear advantages for organisations based in the regions to develop more
direct links with government departments rather than having to
work through the regional tier.

Finally, the research found that there are a number of opportunities
for innovation at the sub-regional level and potentially fewer
constraints under the new arrangements. LEPs provide an opportunity for
economic and labour market development and should develop according to
local needs. There are also opportunities for the North of England to
configure new relationships across existing boundaries, such as on a
pan-northern basis or, more importantly, through collaborative
approaches with a reinvigorated Scotland.

In terms of understanding sub-national change, the key finding of the
research was that the abolition of regional development bodies in
the North did not invalidate the concept of regional development
or its significance as a level of policy co-ordination. The
research also found clear evidence of the emergence of a Common-Sense
Regionalism - which recognised that, while the North East needed to
respond to the new environment by taking advantage of any new
opportunities and innovative ways of working, some form of co-ordination
and integration at the regional level is still required. Such a response
confirmed the continuing importance of flexible decentralised `networks'
within a system of multi-level governance, despite the intentions of
central government structural changes.

References to the research

The key outputs that underpinned the impact include:

• Shaw,K.and Humphrey,L. (2004) `Regional devolution and the development
of "empowered deliberative democracy": emerging patterns of stakeholder
involvement in the North East of England' Environment and Planning:A 36 (12): 2183-2202- available from HEI on request

• 2012: the Association of North East Councils awarded Shaw a grant of £15,000
to examine the impact of greater Scottish autonomy on the North of
England.

Details of the impact

The impact achieved by this research covers local, regional and national
levels of governance, a range of UK government departments and a variety
of public and voluntary sector bodies. It can also be situated within
Northumbria University's strong regional mission to: `collaborate with
universities and other organisations in the North East to improve the
reputation and sustainability of the Region'. The impact was underpinned
by three important factors:

The case study author's extensive research expertise in local and
regional governance, his reputation for engaging with policy-makers and
his long-term involvement in regional partnerships ensured that a range
of sub-national and national decision-makers were open to the
implementation of new ideas. The impact of the work, and Shaw's
role within this, was noted in the letter sent by the Administrator of
the Millfield House Foundation to the Vice Chancellor of Northumbria
University: `The Trustees were particularly impressed with the impact
on (the Department of) Communities and Local Government and
Civil Servants from other departments, which must be a first for
anyone in the North East'(Source 1).

The timeliness of the research was also important, as it was aimed to
influence the shape and character of the post-regionalist framework by
bringing forward practical proposals before new arrangements were `set
in stone'. Given this chronology, the research was the first in-depth
empirical study of the implications of this major change in English
governance after 2010. Its policy importance was in capturing a wide
range of stakeholder views in a single authoritative source. The former
Director of The Government Office for the North East offers the view
that: `You and colleagues accurately described the changes that took
place arising from the election of the Coalition Government in 2010.
You also summarised the various shades of opinion that could be found
amongst the public, private and voluntary sectors'(Source 2).

The research adopted a `co-production' model which aimed to engage
policy makers and practitioners from the outset in identifying and
framing the questions that need to be addressed. This approach provided
a discursive space for discussion, an explicitly practical focus to the
work and ensured that the research findings were of direct relevance to
policy development.

The research underpinned and made a distinct and material contribution
to public policy, particularly in relation to how a range of national
and sub-national decision-makers responded to the changes in regional
governance after 2010:

The finding that there was a need to develop a new flexible
network that linked Whitehall and the region was accepted and
taken forward by senior national civil servants to the extent that a
new, Cross-Governmental group was set up, chaired by the Director of
Finance at CLG. As he notes in his corroborative evidence: `One of
the recommendations of your work was that Government set up a forum
for the departments with a presence in the North East. I took this up
as DCLG director for the North East. This forum was established in
mid-2011 and has met every quarter since, with increasing attendance.
It now has members from a wide range of departments, ANEC and
voluntary organisations (VONNE). It has proved a very useful way of
sharing information and ensuring that the different departments and
agencies in the North East are up to speed with what other
organisations are doing'(Source 3).

Recent meetings of the Cross-Government Group have included a
focus on education policy (including academies), innovation and changes
in welfare benefits (Cross-Government Group agenda and minutes: Source
4). For one BIS civil servant: `The research influenced the
development of emerging regional engagement strategy within government
departments. The meetings continue on a quarterly basis, bringing
together representatives from over 15 central Government departments
and agencies with a footprint or activity within the North East. It
provides a useful forum to share updates on policy developments and
shared agendas, as well as an informal opportunity to develop closer
working arrangements on office locations, civil service employment,
the take up of apprenticeships and future policy initiatives'(Source
5).

The research finding that the localism agenda offered new creative
ways of directly bringing together civil servants and key regional
stakeholders was accepted and taken forward by both civil servants
and regional organisations in the North East. This can be seen in the
fact that the Director of the Association of North East Councils (ANEC)
and of Voluntary Organisations North East (VONNE) are both members of
the Cross-Government Group. The Director of VONNE commented that `it
is rare in my experience to see real tangible results stemming from
policy funded projects. I wish that I could have videoed the Cross
Government meeting that I went to on Friday. It was an extremely
valuable use of three hours. Most of the major Government departments
were represented at a senior level. It was clear that they were
informing each other and joining things up. This group was brought
about as a result of the Millfield House funded work. It is valuable
and it is making a difference'. (Source 6)

The research finding that there is still a need for regional `voice'
and for developing new more creative and flexible approaches to regional
collaboration in period of rapid change was accepted by a wide range
of individuals and organisations involved in the original research. As a
result of this, the Association of North East Councils (ANEC) directly
commissioned Keith Shaw, in late 2012, to examine the potential impacts of
greater Scottish autonomy on the wider North (both the North East and
Cumbria). The research adopted a similar co-production model to the
initial research in examining similar opportunities for flexible
networking outside formal structures and was particularly focused on
assessing greater opportunities for business collaboration and
joint-approaches by local economic development bodies on both sides of the
border. The research report, Borderlands: can the North East and
Cumbria benefit from greater Scottish autonomy? was published in
June 2013 and advocated the creation of new collaborative cross-border
structures and networks, including a new `Border Visions' Partnership
bringing together the five local authorities and other public bodies on
each side of the border.

Sources to corroborate the impact

Testimony on impact of research on national policy-makers (Chief
Administrator of the Millfield House Foundation)

Testimony on the scale and extent of the research in capturing a range
of stakeholders views (Former Director, Government Office for the North
East).

Testimony on role of Cross-Government Group (Finance Director, CLG)

Role of Cross-Government Group: Minutes and Agenda of North East Area
Cross-Governmental Group Meetings 2012 -2013 - available from HEI on
request

Testimony on role of Cross-Government Group: (Head of Office, BIS
Local.)

Testimony on the role and Importance of the research in achieving
impact: (Director, VONNE).